Per S.E. Cupp (a perported atheist): “I like religion being a check and knowing that my president goes home every night addressing someone above him and not thinking all the power resides right here… Atheists don’t have that.”

Does that statement make sense coming from a person who supposedly does not believe there is anyone “above him” to address? She’s saying it’s better/safer to have a leader who ascribes to myth. Do you agree?

Honestly, when I first spotted the headline of the article, I assumed her position was going to be that it’s safer to have a religious leader due to the fact that we deal with so many other religious leaders, or something along those lines. . . but this?

p.s. Warm greetings to all my old pals on the forum : )

I am a atheist.
I don’t believe in anything supernatural.
I think that the New Agers are as deluded as the religious.
I don’t even see the evidence to support acupuncture or chiropractic medicine.
And yet I would not vote for a candidate who claimed to be an atheist.
Anyone naive enough to run for President of a country in which 42 percent of the residents believe that Jesus is coming back by 2040 is not smart enough to govern anything.

I’m still lost on the atheist as mystic opinion. Ok, Bill Mahr is a little out there. Sam has said he is not an atheist and has also said he is in to eastern types of philosophies and mysticism. Other than that, the atheists I know, and even most of the famous ones I know about, Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, Grayling, etc say they don’t believe in ANYTHING supernatural.

Also, atheist doesn’t mean ANTI-theist. It simply means “doesn’t believe in god or gods.” It also doesn’t mean KNOWing there are no god or gods—just simply no belief in a god or gods. Why pollute it with unnecessary definitions. And, we do have to define ourselves by what we DON’T believe in because the overwhelming majority of the ENTIRE WORLD POPULATION believes in some kind of god or gods. It is EXTREMELY important to stand up and be counted as someone who does not BELIEVE. By the way, I’m ALSO an agnostic. I can hold both those titles. I can also add humanist. I can add secularist. None of these terms are self-limiting and none of them mean exactly the same thing. Why do we have to keep having these kinds of semantic arguments among ourselves. No wonder the theists are winning hearts and minds. We’re too busy attacking each other over the use of stupid words and not embracing the meaning behind them.

If you want to call most atheists mystics, fine, go ahead, I can’t stop you. But, I do disagree with you. Very. Strongly.

I’m still lost on the atheist as mystic opinion. Ok, Bill Mahr is a little out there. Sam has said he is not an atheist and has also said he is in to eastern types of philosophies and mysticism. Other than that, the atheists I know, and even most of the famous ones I know about, Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, Grayling, etc say they don’t believe in ANYTHING supernatural.

Also, atheist doesn’t mean ANTI-theist. It simply means “doesn’t believe in god or gods.” It also doesn’t mean KNOWing there are no god or gods—just simply no belief in a god or gods. Why pollute it with unnecessary definitions. And, we do have to define ourselves by what we DON’T believe in because the overwhelming majority of the ENTIRE WORLD POPULATION believes in some kind of god or gods. It is EXTREMELY important to stand up and be counted as someone who does not BELIEVE. By the way, I’m ALSO an agnostic. I can hold both those titles. I can also add humanist. I can add secularist. None of these terms are self-limiting and none of them mean exactly the same thing. Why do we have to keep having these kinds of semantic arguments among ourselves. No wonder the theists are winning hearts and minds. We’re too busy attacking each other over the use of stupid words and not embracing the meaning behind them.

If you want to call most atheists mystics, fine, go ahead, I can’t stop you. But, I do disagree with you. Very. Strongly.

The term atheist has become colored with negativity.
A-theist simply means not believing in god.
Due to the lack of evidence, there are many things whose existence is doubtful.
And yet there is no word for people don’t believe in ghosts or unicorns.

There is also not a national poll done about “would you elect an a-unicornist or an a-ghoster. Theism is a huge part of people’s everyday lives. It is on every street corner, in every election. I wasn’t born into a world where I never heard a prayer or never went to church. I was born in a world where EVERY SINGLE DAY we thanked the LORD JESUS for our blessings and our food and asked for his continued presence in our lives. So did every one else I grew up with. I didn’t hear about unicorns until I was about 10 or so. To a southerner who grew up with church as part of my everyday existence, I feel the NEED to define myself as an atheist. I don’t believe the same way everyone in my home town and my family believes. I don’t know how else to make this point to you.

I have to use the word atheist. Don’t care if it is negative. Don’t care what baggage it has accumulated. Don’t care if Sam Harris hisself don’t like it. Don’t care.

There is also not a national poll done about “would you elect an a-unicornist or an a-ghoster. Theism is a huge part of people’s everyday lives. It is on every street corner, in every election. I wasn’t born into a world where I never heard a prayer or never went to church. I was born in a world where EVERY SINGLE DAY we thanked the LORD JESUS for our blessings and our food and asked for his continued presence in our lives. So did every one else I grew up with. I didn’t hear about unicorns until I was about 10 or so. To a southerner who grew up with church as part of my everyday existence, I feel the NEED to define myself as an atheist. I don’t believe the same way everyone in my home town and my family believes. I don’t know how else to make this point to you.

I have to use the word atheist. Don’t care if it is negative. Don’t care what baggage it has accumulated. Don’t care if Sam Harris hisself don’t like it. Don’t care.

I am an atheist. Be me eversohumble.

Not collecting coins is not a hobby.
How can you not believe in something that doesn’t exist?
I see your point.
All I am saying is that one can flow along lightly through life without the self imposed labels of aghoster, aunicorner, aufoer,
aoober, aabomniblesnowmaner, amermaider, afairier, or athiest.
The mind can simply not believe in anything for which there is no evidence.

I hope we get to that world soon, sir. Sadly, it is not the world I live in. I dearly wish I didn’t have to define myself, but I am different than those around me and that is the world that means what I am…ugly as it may be.

My non-belief is not a hobby. I’ve never cared much for that analogy. When everyone around you, and even you yourself are brought up to believe in something that everyone around you, including yourself believes is real, then a word to show it doesn’t exists makes sense. I started to not believe and when I began to tell people around me that I was doubting and questioning, I found out really quick that they ACTUALLY DO believe this bullshit. They’re willing to die for it. That fact, as much as any other makes me long for the day you’re describing, where we don’t have to define ourselves in this “negative” way. I honestly don’t think it is going to happen in my life time and that makes me sad. You obviously live in a different world and I am jealous.

I hope we get to that world soon, sir. Sadly, it is not the world I live in. I dearly wish I didn’t have to define myself, but I am different than those around me and that is the world that means what I am…ugly as it may be.

My non-belief is not a hobby. I’ve never cared much for that analogy. When everyone around you, and even you yourself are brought up to believe in something that everyone around you, including yourself believes is real, then a word to show it doesn’t exists makes sense. I started to not believe and when I began to tell people around me that I was doubting and questioning, I found out really quick that they ACTUALLY DO believe this bullshit. They’re willing to die for it. That fact, as much as any other makes me long for the day you’re describing, where we don’t have to define ourselves in this “negative” way. I honestly don’t think it is going to happen in my life time and that makes me sad. You obviously live in a different world and I am jealous.

As the sense of self loses its opacity, labels, positive or negative, have no place to stick.
There is a state of mind into which all beliefs become irrelevant.
I no longer believe that the sun will come up tomorrow morning in the East.
I do not not believe that it will come up in the West.
The sun simply comes up.
Belief and non-belief is what feeds and defines the sense of being a separate self.
I am suggesting that life can be experienced beyond belief.

One final thought, I am immediately suspicious of anyone who defines themselves as an ‘atheist.’ Usually they are anything but. Remember some of the most notorious dictators and butchers of the past century (Mao, Stalin, Hitler) were self proclaimed atheists but they were as mystical as the most dangerously religious zealot. I actually would vote for a psycho Christian if their political policies were to leave me alone (not force his religion on me) to do as I please as long as I wasn’t violating anybody’s rights. That’s all I ask for.

She may, sadly, have a point. This forum has proven to me how deeply rude and intolerant too many of my fellow non-believers can be. I do suspect that it’s mainly the ‘sausage fest’ effect and as more women post, we’ll see a better quality of discourse.

I don’t think it’s fair or reasonable to assume, though, that faith or the lack of it in any way indicates whether a candidate possesses a decent level of humility. In fact, I’d be willing to wager a large sum of money that the mere desire to run for President of the United States of America indicates an above average level of hubris. Just comes with the territory. The real question then becomes, does this person have the self-awareness and sense of duty to keep it in check? If the past is an indicator (duh), then, all other things being equal, I have to vote for the non-believer.

The question really is, besides the possibility of the believer making an important decision for all based upon a delusion, is just whom or what is the focus of their sense of duty.

I think that, based upon the many quotes of previous presidents, it’s safe to say that their sense of duty to their faith came far ahead of their sense of duty to all their constituents.

She may, sadly, have a point. This forum has proven to me how deeply rude and intolerant too many of my fellow non-believers can be. I do suspect that it’s mainly the ‘sausage fest’ effect and as more women post, we’ll see a better quality of discourse.

I don’t think it’s fair or reasonable to assume, though, that faith or the lack of it in any way indicates whether a candidate possesses a decent level of humility. In fact, I’d be willing to wager a large sum of money that the mere desire to run for President of the United States of America indicates an above average level of hubris. Just comes with the territory. The real question then becomes, does this person have the self-awareness and sense of duty to keep it in check? If the past is an indicator (duh), then, all other things being equal, I have to vote for the non-believer.

The question really is, besides the possibility of the believer making an important decision for all based upon a delusion, is just whom or what is the focus of their sense of duty.

I think that, based upon the many quotes of previous presidents, it’s safe to say that their sense of duty to their faith came far ahead of their sense of duty to all their constituents.

I’d love to hear a reporter ask Mitt what it feels like, joining an organization that was openly racist.

I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s not the laughable candidates that’s the problem, but rather the electorate.

Yes, we get what we deserve in a way, don’t we? Paul Ryan, atheist loving christian. Seems a bit conflicted, eh?

Humans, like chimpanzees, have evolved to wipe out the tribes that adjoin their territory.
We spent the first hundred million years fearing (for good reason) anybody who looked or spoke different than us.
And no matter how much we deny it, the wiring is still there.
It is natural for humans to be racist.
I trust the Mormons (a little) more than the patchouli goolies who claim that they love everybody.

This linked article perfectly illustrates my concern that the term ‘atheist’ is a negative and describes what a person does NOT believe but it doesn’t or shouldn’t imply that a person embraces reason. It rarely works that way…

from the article
“Communists reject religious faith but embrace a secularized version of faith demanding blind acceptance of collectivist dogmas such as, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Atheism means only that one does not believe in god; it does not mean that one embraces reason.”

Just saying this doesn’t make it true. There are plenty of communists who believe in god and have religious faith. Trying to make the soviet states non-religious was a big mistake. The more you tell people they can’t do something or believe something the more a majority of them will want to do or believe just that.

I know your point is atheist is a negative word. I agree with you. Until a better one comes a long that means what atheist means, I’ll have to continue to use it and continue to explain myself—at least in the world now live. This will change in time, humans have to be given the chance to grow up. We haven’t yet. “We” will still need to cling to hope to make it through this life. Hope comes in the form of gods, good luck charms, prayer, rituals, etc etc etc.

I get what you’re saying, and I think others here do as well. You don’t have to keep preaching.